James Reilly (Dublin North, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

The proposal is to substitute “what other” for "whether another” in the proposed new section 88(2) of the Children Act as contained in section 6 of this Bill. The purpose of section 88 is to introduce a new power to transfer children between remand centres where the remand centre to which the child is being transferred caters for that class of child or where the Minister for Children and Youth Affairs considers that the transfer is necessary in the interests of the good governance of remand centres. Section 88 (2), as drafted, requires the Minister to consult the director or board of management of both remand centres involved in the proposed transfer so as to ascertain whether the transfer would be in the child's best interests or if the transfer would not be in the child's best interests whether another course of action should be adopted in respect of the child. The use of the words "whether another” was intended to lead to consideration of other options for the child in a situation where the proposed transfer would not be in the child's best interests. I am advised that if a transfer is not approved by the Minister other courses of action would be considered depending on the circumstances. I have raised this matter with the Office of the Attorney General and I am advised that the inclusion of the phrase "or if the transfer would not be in the child's best interests" has the effect of narrowing the Minister's position to deciding "what other" course of action should be adopted in respect of the child, rather than "whether another" course of action should be adopted. For this reason I am accepting the amendment.